showbanner-8

VIDEO: Lincoln (2012)

Mendo doesn’t care if this was the first movie ever filmed in his hometown, he’s gonna say what he really thinks! Also, before you ask, yes, that is a real product.

Scroll down to comment on this video...

You may also like...

  • MichaelANovelli

    Not as good as my Skyfall review, but I like it. ¬†ūüôā

    • $36060516

      I will actually watch this one unlike the Skyfall as I have no plans on seeing “Lincoln” so don’t care about spoilers.¬† Wait, what, he get’s shot in a theater?¬† I thought they were going to change that post Aurora, Colorado Dark Knight screening.

  • I’ll probably see it just for Daniel Day-Lewis alone. He’s just one of those actors that I love to watch perform. Sure he takes his job a bit too seriously, I mean he only takes a job every five years it seems. But when he performs he makes it count, and here it looks no different. Plus its just nice to see that the creators tried to give us a movie that doesn’t paint Lincoln as this godly figure and that an old school filmmaker like¬†Spielberg, is¬†trying to give us a more realistic and less black and white take on history. Its a bit refreshing, even if we have heard the story a million times before.

    • MichaelANovelli

      I commend them for that as well, I just feel that they could have done a better job of it…

      • Fair enough, but it seems to be a step in the right direction.

  • Cristiona

    Wait, Lincoln gets shot by John Wilkes Boothe?  Dude!  Spoilers!

    • No, he survives and then steals a giant mechanical spider and goes to kill Robert E.Lee.

      • LindaMinda

        Those vampires sure wanted revenge.

  • I… Disagree completely. ¬†I loved the hell out of Lincoln, definitely one of the best movies of the year.¬†

    • MichaelANovelli

      If you say so. ¬†ūüėČ

  • Thank you! I know so may people who think that Abraham Lincoln was essentially god incarnate, and if I say anything about his real flaws, they start berating me for being a southerner who obviously hates black people and thinks they should be slaves. In fact, if I say anything about the fact that this war was about taxes, and slavery was the issue used to stir people up about it, I get…well…called racist again, to put it mildly. So yeah, I was thrilled when you started addressing that Lincoln had real issues and that many parts of the North supported slavery. Thank you very much. ūüôā

    Sometime, I would like to see a movie about what really happened in the Civil War (or the War Between the States, whichever you prefer), one that addresses the real issues on either side and doesn’t paint everyone in the South as stereotypical, cartoonishly evil, whip-cracking assholes (which they were not; some were, but if you read writings by freed slaves from that time, quite a few of their owners weren’t sadistic and treated their slaves well). A Jefferson Davis movie would be great, for instance.

    Ah, well. What’s the use in dreaming? Thank you again for your review of the film. ūüôā

    PS: The best book I’ve seen on the Civil War was With Lee in Virginia by G.A.Henty, a British author who wrote historical fiction for children. Most of his books are painfully stuffed with British propaganda, but his book taking place in the Civil War is fantastic. It gves a balanced view of both sides and doesn’t paint either one as monstrous.

    • MichaelANovelli

      I do what I can. ¬†And, believe it or not, Gone With The Wind is a pretty accurate look at the Civil War, at least in terms of the effect that it had in the people on the ground. ¬†ūüôā

      • Agreed. I like the historical aspects of Gone With the Wind, but I dislike the main characters enough to dislike the movie, unfortunately. ūüôĀ

  • I had just read Team of Rivals, the Doris Kerns Goodwin book that this story has its root, and I was hopping for a broader, epic story of the Lincoln Presidency, not just the one topic that made up thirty pages of a 700 page book. ¬†Thaddeus Stevens was a monster, and giving him such dignity is a shame.

    With such a small topic when the looming crisis of the actual civil war was going on around it made me very angry. ¬†If this was one part of a trilogy about Abraham Lincoln, I’d feel differently about it. ¬†But this little detail in the larger story of the Lincoln Presidency just ignores so many interesting aspects. ¬†I am a massive Lincoln fanboy, and I have no intention of seeing this film.

  • Jeff Stone Stone

    Small dollops of truth to add to the cries of “this is revisionist crap” re: Lincoln.

    “The Great Emancipator” only got round to freeing the slaves two years into the war, at a¬†time when the North was LOSING, and even then it was just a cynical move to provide a rallying point for the ailing Northern cause.¬† There are many¬†references in Lincoln’s works that showed he viewed blacks as inferior to whites,¬†and we are supposed to think he was a living saint for freeing them.¬† We are not supposed to ask why¬†such an obviously abominable practise was allowed to continue into the 18th Century, let alone well into¬†the latter half of the 19th; or reflect on the amusing¬†irony that even feudalist Russia abolished¬†slavery before ‘the land of the free’ did.¬†¬† We are also expected to ignore irritating facts like the Southern States’ legal right to secede, which was ignored, not to mention the valid and also totally¬†ignored questions of state self-administration that were the real causes of the war.¬† Oh, and Lincoln’s despotic suspension of habeus corpus, which would rightly be called a war crime now.¬†¬†None of the soldiers who fought for the Confederacy owned slaves, and¬†not a single one of them¬†went to war to protect that way of life.¬† Most of the people who DID own slaves were able to buy their way out of Confederate¬†military service.¬† What next, a film about how Woodrow Wilson was such a bold visionary for allowing American women¬†to vote in *1919*?¬† Wow, just two and half short decades after my country gave the vote¬†to¬†women, and even then¬†the legalised crooks in power in the US at the time only granted¬†women a severely¬†restricted franchise.¬† They could call the movie “Woody The Coughing Racist”.

  • Torgeaux

    This movie should have¬†been named “The 13th Amendment to the Constitution of The United States of America.”¬† I saw this Saturday afternoon with my wife and mother (their choice, not mine.¬† I had been warned by Mr.Mendo)¬† I was braced for a mediocre movie but not over two hours of an escrutiating execise in ACTING and parlimentary points of order.¬† George must have phoned Steven and told him The People love watching Congressional¬†Debates and the searing drama of VOTING. Lincoln is there, mostly for foksey, wise backwoods stories.¬† Every thing about him is breifly addressed.¬† Sally Fields as Mrs. Lincoln is thrown in for the little gold statue consideration.¬† The movie constantly demands you take it seriously.¬† Well, speaking for myself, it was a non-stop bore. I constantly kept wanting to insert the overused cliche of “Get on With¬†It” from Monty Python multiple times.¬† It was something to do while my ass went numb sitting there. I will say I liked the ending.¬†Nice misdirection there, but way too late.

    • MichaelANovelli

      I do what I can, but I can only do so much. ¬†Though, your comments gave me an idea: if Lincoln hadn’t been the title character, if he’d just been in the background (you know, kind of like in the actual movie) and the movie had been explicitly about the guys who did his dirty work…well, the movie may not have been better, but it would be more honest.